One day after a juror made an impassioned plea to be dismissed from the corruption trial of Assemblyman Sheldon Silver not long after the start of deliberations, the most intensely scrutinized jury deliberating in New York City reconvened in federal court on Wednesday but did not reach a verdict.

The jurors will return on Monday to resume deliberations after the long Thanksgiving weekend.

The request from a juror to be dismissed so early in the deliberations was highly unusual, and the vivid language used in the note sent to the presiding judge in the case offered a look at the normally secretive process in which guilt or innocence is determined.

“I have a different opinion/view so far in this case and it is making me feel very, very uncomfortable,” the juror wrote to Judge Valerie E. Caproni on Tuesday. “I am so stressed out right now that I can’t even write normally. I don’t feel like I can be myself right now! I need to leave!”

The juror, whose identity was not made public, had also asked for a private meeting with the judge.

On Wednesday morning, Judge Caproni told jurors in Federal District Court in Manhattan that such a meeting would be improper. “The law, generally, does not allow me to meet with a member of a deliberating jury, because the secrecy of jury deliberations is a cornerstone of our jury system,” she said.

She reminded the jurors to participate in deliberations respectfully and with “an open mind.”

If, after hearing from other jurors, “you hear something that makes sense and causes you to change your initial judgment, you should not hesitate to do so,” Judge Caproni added. “That is what deliberation is all about.”

By the same token, the judge added, jurors were entitled to their opinions, “and no juror should give up a point of view that the juror conscientiously believes, based on the evidence, the facts and the law, simply because the juror is outnumbered.”

The jury is weighing Mr. Silver’s case after a three-week trial in which prosecutors sought to prove that he had obtained nearly $4 million in illegal payments in exchange for taking official actions that benefited two real estate developers and a doctor who researches a rare form of cancer.

In addressing the jury, Mr. Silver’s lawyers denied that any quid pro quo existed, and argued that his actions over the years were legal and that conflicts of interest were unavoidable for lawmakers.

On Wednesday morning, Judge Caproni, who had made it clear she would not excuse the juror, rejected the request for a private meeting. She sent the jurors back to deliberate, reminding them that they had to reach a unanimous decision on all seven counts, which include fraud, extortion and money laundering.

The jurors, ranging in age from 28 to 69, betrayed no outward signs of turmoil as the judge spoke to them in court on Wednesday.

Mr. Silver, 71, a Manhattan Democrat, resigned as the Assembly speaker after his arrest in January, but he remains in the Legislature. After the proceeding, he was asked his interpretation of the juror’s requests as he walked from the courthouse.

He declined to give an opinion about what it might mean.

“I think it’s all in the hands of the jury, and it would be foolish to speculate as to what is taking place in deliberations,” Mr. Silver said.

When asked what he was thankful for, he looked up to the sky and then emitted a short chuckle. “Great lawyers and beautiful weather,” he said.

Susanne Craig and Nate Schweber contributed reporting.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page A32 of the New York edition with the headline: Silver Trial Jury Stops for Holiday; Deliberations to Resume Next Week . Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe